Skip to Main Content
IBM Power Ideas Portal

This portal is to open public enhancement requests against IBM Power Systems products, including IBM i. To view all of your ideas submitted to IBM, create and manage groups of Ideas, or create an idea explicitly set to be either visible by all (public) or visible only to you and IBM (private), use the IBM Unified Ideas Portal (

Shape the future of IBM!

We invite you to shape the future of IBM, including product roadmaps, by submitting ideas that matter to you the most. Here's how it works:

Search existing ideas

Start by searching and reviewing ideas and requests to enhance a product or service. Take a look at ideas others have posted, and add a comment, vote, or subscribe to updates on them if they matter to you. If you can't find what you are looking for,

Post your ideas
  1. Post an idea.

  2. Get feedback from the IBM team and other customers to refine your idea.

  3. Follow the idea through the IBM Ideas process.

Specific links you will want to bookmark for future use

Welcome to the IBM Ideas Portal ( - Use this site to find out additional information and details about the IBM Ideas process and statuses.

IBM Unified Ideas Portal ( - Use this site to view all of your ideas, create new ideas for any IBM product, or search for ideas across all of IBM. - Use this email to suggest enhancements to the Ideas process or request help from IBM for submitting your Ideas.

Status Not under consideration
Workspace IBM i
Created by Guest
Created on Nov 21, 2013

Subfile Control Record Deleted when Subfile Record is Deleted

In RDP 8.0.3: Using the "Design page screen controls" in Screen Designer to edit a screen, removing a subfile record removes that subfile's control record, even if not selected. It appears at least two scenarios display this behavior:
1. Using "Design screens" and removing a subfile record from the "Included" list;
2. Using "Design records" and deleting a subfile record.

Fortunately, in the first scenario, a <Ctrl>-Z (undo) restores the control record; another <Ctrl>-Z restores the subfile record. This implies that there are two separate actions being taken by RDP, despite the user performing just one action. It's like it has a mind of its own! ;-)

Unfortunately, in the second scenario, <Ctrl>-Z does NOT restore either record.

If this is "by design", I respectfully request this functionality, or at least its implementation, be reconsidered!

Use Case:

1. In RSE, right-click a screen file which contains a subfile, a control record, and at least one other record. Select "Open With > Screen Designer".
2. Choose the "Design" view (tab at bottom of window), make sure the "Design page screen controls" (top of window ) is open, select the "Design screens" radio button and the "Records" tab.
3. Highlight a subfile record under the "Included" column, then click the "Remove" button.
4. In addition to the selected subfile record being removed, its associated control record is also removed.

Idea priority Medium
  • Guest
    Sep 14, 2015

    Due to processing by IBM, this request was reassigned to have the following updated attributes:
    Brand - Servers and Systems Software
    Product family - Programming Languages
    Product - Developer for Power Systems

    For recording keeping, the previous attributes were:
    Brand - Rational
    Product family - Design & development
    Product - Developer for Power Systems

  • Guest
    Apr 3, 2014

    I appreciate the intent of keeping SFLs and SFLCTLs tightly-coupled. My suggestion has to do not with this idea per se, but rather with the implementation through RDP.
    I just experimented with SDA, and while removal of a SFL record flags the SFLCTL with "*ERROR", IT DOES NOT DELETE the SFLCTL record, as RDP does.
    I appreciate your consideration of this issue, but cannot understand your defense of destructive operational behavior.

  • Guest
    Jan 17, 2014

    Because it is invalid DDS to have a subfile or subfile control without the other, it has been the design of IBM DDS tools all the way back to SDA to alway work with them as a pair. So create, add remove and delete operations always apply to the pair even if only one of the records is selected. This prevents the user from creating invalid DDS.
    We consider this an important feature.
    The fact that the undo is more granular is not by design but just by virtue of how things are implemented.
    Thank you for taking the time to suggest this enhancement to our product. Many of our product enhancements result from feedback from our customers, so your input is always very important to us.

  • Guest
    Dec 30, 2013

    This RFE is consistent with our strategy and product roadmap and IBM is continuing to evaluate.